Cardoza told me directly that McDonald would be charged even though there's a perception from some, rightly or wrongly, that the Santa Clara County DA's office is thought to be lenient.

"The real question, will he be charged because there is enough evidence or because of the national spotlight on domestic violence despite lack of evidence", says Cardoza.

So, I asked him further, Will the Ray Rice case have an impact on the DA's decision? "Absolutely, it will--expect to see him, (McDonald), in a criminal court."

Cardoza's prediction is significant only because there's been a noticeable lack of news regarding McDonald's legal status. The DA, I assume, when it gets the case, will interview witnesses and, presumably, talk to police and examine the evidence.

19 comments:

Don't keep your hopes up.The DA in Santa Clara County is too timid to take on the 49ers.Same goes for all the judges down there. Looking for a weak criminal justice system? Look no further than Santa Clara Co.Unbelievable!

The Santa Clara County DA is not known to be lenient, just the opposite. Local criminal defense lawyers all know that. It is unlikely that Michael Cardoza stated point blank that Santa Clara County DA Jeff Rosen is "known to be lenient."

Rich, I'm a fan of yours but, please mind your journalistic practices. When you write: "Cardoza told me directly that McDonald would be charged even though the Santa Clara County DA's office is thought to be lenient."

-that certainly implies it was Cordoza's thoughts that the DA is lenient. I'm betting every reader would assume this. Please be clearer when interjecting your opinions in with others.

That's a pretty bold prediction by Cardoza since conventional thinking is the 49ers have already vetted the matter and are allowing McDonald to play because they feel confident multiple eyewitnesses will depose McDonald did not physically abuse her..

Look, prosecutors are a nutty, neurotic, bunch. And I know that prosecutors file charges not based on guilty or innocent- that's the last criteria. They go by A: Most likely to make look guilty. B: who they charge that has some -but not much- money.and they can therefore extort into a guilty plea of no time,etc, to avoid a costly trial and lawyer fee's. Happens all the time. C: If they are wealthy and the case is flimsy? Prosecutors avoid charging at all cost- it makes them look bad to spend money and have a great attorney run rings around them. D: The famous: IF it can make the prosecutor a name- he goes for it. IF,that name brings much money to the community (think the Raiders coach who assaulted the assistant coaches head through a wall) THEN they suddenly see things the defendants way-lol.All in all? Its money and winning based...guilty or innocent doesn't matter.Its why Polices are no longer charged with murder. Make a 13 year old into target practice?...no charges. Prosecutors blame the boy! "He smoked weed!.he had a toy gun!"Of course- execute him!A bonus from Stan on real life.

He must be guilty if he was arrested. Kick him out of football, ruin his career. Then if he isn't charged or found guilty it is because he is a celebrity and he had a good lawyer. He's a thug football player with tattoos for god's sake, horrible role model! Lock him up and throw away the key.

What is it with the NFL having an epidemic of their players hitting women anyway? I guess it's been going on for awhile but in a league that is the most popular in American sports, why aren't fans getting upset about it and boycotting the games? It's gotten out of hand and it seems as if every team has at least 1 or 2 players who engage in physically bashing women, one of the most cowardly things to do imaginable. Now we've got Vike's running back star Adrian Peterson facing charges that he beat his four year old son with a stick. And apparently, Peterson said: "That's how my dad used to disipline me!" That's really sad if that's true, but it's not a surprise as abused kids later become abusers. Peterson needs some serious therapy!